linux-kernel - Re: Latest vfs scalability patch

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1254827438.21044.251.camel@laptop>
Date:	Tue, 06 Oct 2009 13:10:38 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
Cc:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	Ravikiran G Thirumalai <kiran@...lex86.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Latest vfs scalability patch

On Tue, 2009-10-06 at 12:26 +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:

> I did a quick perf analysis on that, but only on 8 clients (64 clients
> basically causes perf to shit itself, it's just not functional).

Even when used with -a so that you profile each cpu? I can imagine the
cacheline contention from the inherited counters to render a 64 thread
machine less than usable?


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/